Machine Control

[SBP]

Can anyone tell us if there are plans to update the way Machine control is handled by Pro-tools?

ProTools is fine if you have pictures playing from a hard drive however it gets clunky if you need to control a tape machine.

We are using a ProControl and are thinking about also getting a Icon will machine control be any better?

Things we don’t like about the current machine control set up.

Needing to find the specific machine from the list of thousands (why can we not choose how many machines are in the list and then give them our own name –or better why can’t protools just know what machine is connected) Once the machine is connected and the peripheral settings sorted out why do we need to hold option and push “ext” to get the machine on line why not just make it go on line.

Why can I not copy, paste, cut, fade or anything when the machine is in scrub. If I’m laying SFX or doing any editing I want to jog the picture to where I need it then I want to do something at that point. (Auto spot is OK but I find myself always having to hit the “ext” and the “online” buttons –call me lazy but why do I need to constantly hit “scrub” then “ext” and “online” at each point that I want to edit and then “*enter” if I need the selector to match up with the picture.

Why is there no offset function?

In an ideal world we would connect a machine put it online and the pro tools selector and the video would be at the same point from that time on (Clicking on the time line would cue the machine to that point using the + and – keys would move you in frame advance. You would be able to do any editing while the jog wheel was active. Taking the machine offline would park the video where it is and enable the operator to play just audio and move around the time line with out moving the picture clicking online again would take you back to where the video machine was parked.

Anyway I’ve raced off back to the reason for posting is machine control on the Icon different from machine control on ProControl?

[Roy Pahlman]

No, machine control is machine control. Seperate item of its own, so I'm sure it will act the same with an ICON. However it will select the proper profile for your machine, just click the "node" button inside peripherals and it will come the profile for the machine you have connected to your 9 pin. I agree it is far far from perfect, but I guess I have learned to live with it. I use it with Pro Control as well. Anyway, good luck with your ICON, (nice desk). Maybe you should look for a Timeline Microlynx.

[FlorianE]

We had the same question, and got a reply from Digi that they were cooperating with CB, who are producing a range of serial controllers, with the aim to have machine control talk best to a CB controller, which in turn would control the external machines.
It seems that each tape machine brand uses its (very) own interpretation of 9-pin protocol, and that to produce a reliable general controller is quite a speciality.

Cheers

Florian

CB Electronics (http://www.colinbroad.com/index.html)

[Frank Kruse]

Are you kidding?! Does this mean we have to buy a whole CB controller to work with MC in the future? I think digi/avid should first look at their other products that have working MC like AVID media and filmcomposers. I know that CB is one of the best companies when it comes to syncing multiple machines but I think there is a great number of users that need rather simple MC but one that works as advertised...

frank.


We had the same question, and got a reply from Digi that they were cooperating with CB, who are producing a range of serial controllers, with the aim to have machine control talk best to a CB controller, which in turn would control the external machines.
It seems that each tape machine brand uses its (very) own interpretation of 9-pin protocol, and that to produce a reliable general controller is quite a speciality.

Cheers

Florian

CB Electronics (http://www.colinbroad.com/index.html)

[FlorianE]

there is a great number of users that need rather simple MC but one that works as advertised...




I totally agree.
But "simple MC" does remind me of a customer request which has persecuted me for most of my professional life: "Why don't you have a standard bad monitor?"

MC with TC seems to be tricky for microtiming between TC, commands and clock.
Most often, if there are MC problems, they disappear if you wire TC directly between tape and PT's SYNC I/O, and uncheck "use MC Timecode".
Also, some tape machines work reliably, others after a few tries, and others hardly at all. Maybe Digi should publish a list of machines which work reliably with their MC as advertised.

On the other hand, if I look at the actual need for MC:
For editing and mixing, non-linear video solutions are very much faster, reliable and cheaper than the old videotape machines.
And for delivery of mixes: layback to tape?? Increasingly, it is files, on CD, DVD, MOD, HD. Only for straight Dolby SR mixes we still need DAT to send to the labs.

So I can sort of understand Digi's lack of enthousiasm for the subject. (Whereas I stubbornly insist on the need for Postconform under OSX, including MC, as long as people still record on tape...)

Cheers

Florian